All these ideas seem to crowd to a single point – as to whether or not – we can be held accountable to our own decisions.

If our congressman voted for 1109 because we have voiced out that he must in order to bring that P20 m congressional earmarks to our district, then that in itself promotes social justice.

On the other hand if the the reverse is true, meaning, we voiced out that he better not vote for 1109 even if that would result in P20 m less of the normal ‘basket of goods and services’, then again fine.

This is how it goes. GMA is at her disposal so much taxpayers money. With it, she can summon obedience to her whim from everyone, even the most principled congressman we know – all of them can be ‘bribed’ or ‘prostituted’, if we can call it that.

In short, it is a God damn political reality.

The hospital recruits surgeons who are trained to use the tool properly. The operative phrase being “trained to use the tool properly”.

Ditto for spoon and forks.

We can only return to considering consensus when we have finished laying down new systems for participation. Why bother with consensus now when our system of consensus is contradictory in itself? Rizal put it: “he who is building out a sculpture out of bad type of mud is far more stupid.” (And I do not refer to you, of course, but to our Bastusang Pambansa who waves consensus like a middle finger to the people.)

It is why consensus is the name of the game, and why consensus is an illusion that makes us believe we are really heard when we are not, and this fetish for consensus is what led to last Tuesday night’s bacchanalia at the Bastusang Pambansa.

I know this stand is alien and unpopular, but this is how we view it as Social Democrats. (With me unveiling my label, I preempt and deny any association with the NDF so far).

Democracy is the rule of what is good for all as deemed by those who know what is the practice of politics, and it all boils down to a system of liberating education. As soon as the substantive members of our entire population have the wisdom and the will to decide, then we can lay down what this nation’s definition of democracy is.

That was the practice in ancient Greece.

With universal suffrage, democracy has been redefined as “the rule of what is good for all as deemed by all – educated or not”.

Joe

My definition of democracy, from what I have garnered from my limited studies, is that of a system wherein representation is truly representative and the decisions made are not of what the majority of rumbling stomachs and/or greedy mouths believes it to be. Democracy is the rule of what is good for all as deemed by those who know what is the practice of politics, and it all boils down to a system of liberating education. As soon as the substantive members of our entire population have the wisdom and the will to decide, then we can lay down what this nation’s definition of democracy is.

I am not in the liberty to lay down my own definition myself as I do not presume myself to be a well-versed political scientist: I am still studying it. But I share what I have learned from where. Plato’s The Republic and Aristotle’s Politics have them and are always accessible from the Net, whether it be Project Gutenberg or Wikisource.

And I hope I do not sound petulant by saying these, as I know these are the only ways by which can really define what we are talking about.

Why don’t you present your definition of democracy – and your alternative, right here – or provide a link.

I really have no idea what you are talking about until I get to see the specifics.

we can run a search engine – and look up “definition of democracy” – click here – and identify a common theme.